Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Sushil Kumar vs M/O Railways on 3 October, 2018

              Central Administrative Tribunal
                Principal Bench, New Delhi
                             O.A. No.3633/2018

                               Wednesday, this the 3rd day of October, 2018

            Hon'ble Mr. K.N. Shrivastava, Member (A)
              Hon'ble Mr. S.N. Terdal, Member (J)

Shri Sushil Kumar s/o Sh. Ramesh Kumar
age 21 years
Designation - TADK - Group C
r/o C-25, Paryavaran Complex
Saidul Azaib, South Delhi, Delhi - 110 030
                                                                ..Applicant
(Mr. R K Shukla, Advocate)

                                   Versus

1.   Union of India through Chairman
     Rail Bhawan, New Delhi

2.   The General Manager
     NR Headquarter Baroda House
     New Delhi

3.   The Divisional Railway Manager
     Northern Railway
     Firozpur Division, Punjab

4.   Assistant Personnel Officer
     Northern Railway
     Firozpur Division, Punjab

5.   Jusuf Kabir Ansari
     Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
     Northern Railway
     Firozpur Division, Punjab
                                                             ..Respondents

                             O R D E R (ORAL)

Mr. K.N. Shrivastava:

The applicant was appointed as a substitute Telephone Attendant -
cum - Dak Khallasi (TADK) by the Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), Firozpur Division, Punjab, vide Annexure A-2 order dated 18.10.2017. The 2 appointment was initially for a period of 3 months, which was extendable on satisfactory service.

2. The contention of the applicant is that his engagement has been subsequently extended from time to time. The grievance of the applicant is that he is not being allowed to work since 06.06.2018. He had submitted two representations, namely, the representation dated 06.06.2018 (p.17) to the DRM, Firozpur Division, Punjab and another one dated 27.06.2018 (p.19) to General Manager (GM), Northern Railway, New Delhi. It is stated that the GM, Northern Railway, vide his letter dated 07.08.2018 (p.15), has directed the DRM, Firozpur to take a decision and dispose of the representations of the applicant, but the same has not been done. Accordingly, the applicant has approached the Tribunal in the instant O.A., praying for the following reliefs:-

"(a) to direct the respondent no.2 i.e. General Manager, Northern Railway to take suitable step regarding to issue an order of duty of the applicant with the respondent no.5 or to take other suitable step to accommodate the applicant in accordance with law as the applicant had attained the temporary status on 18.02.2018;
(b) to direct the respondent no.2 to take decision regarding grievance of the applicant in a time bound manner in terms of letter dated 07.08.2018."

3. Considering the nature of the controversy involved, we dispose of the O.A. at the admission stage with a direction to DRM, Firozpur (respondent No.3) to decide the representation dated 06.06.2018 preferred by the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by way of passing a reasoned and speaking order. The applicant shall have liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy, as 3 available to him under law, in case he remains dissatisfied with the order to be passed by respondent No.3 on his representation.

( S.N. Terdal )                                       ( K.N. Shrivastava )
  Member (J)                                               Member (A)

October 3, 2018
/sunil/